Unchilded
BBC is running a series on the falling birthrate in Europe. Today’s installment is on “The Rise of Childfree”.
As I hinted before, I don’t like the term “childfree”, any more than I like “childless” to describe the set of emotions Plagioclase and I have and the decisions we have taken in creating our family without progeny.
“Childless” represents a loss — a couple who wants to have children but are unable to for physical reasons. Or perhaps they can, but choose not to because of genetic issues.
“Childfree” represents an absence of something bad, naughty or “sinful” — “fat-free” or “cancer-free” come to mind as analogues. As much as I moan about not liking children, I don’t think they’re bad for everyone. Just for me. And as I posted in Mac’s thread a few weeks ago, Plagioclase and I revisit the topic every so often, because there are two of us making this choice.
Here, I think, is the problem I’m having. I don’t feel the sense of “liberation” that is also connoted by the “-free” version. We have made a decision, but it wasn’t taken lightly, and it was not in defiance of any mores of society. It was not a liberating event; we didn’t say “We’re not having children, so let’s go on vacation!”
So when someone asks if I have kids, I just say “No, I don’t” and leave it at that. I don’t identify with the people who call themselves “childfree” and complain that they’re being asked to subsidize families. I do tend to identify with those who complain about the increasing focus on “the children” as an excuse to limit the choices, movements and discourse of adults. But one doesn’t have to be “sans child” to feel that way, I think.
And I don’t like “sans child” either. Perhaps I’m just trying to label something that in my heart of hearts I don’t think should be labeled. So I’ll stop.
